Franks Lirit, Cochran Gerald, Reeves Carter, Incze Michael A, Hardy Clinton J, Gordon Adam J, Kelley A Taylor
Program for Addiction Research, Clinical Care, Knowledge and Advocacy (PARCKA), Division of Epidemiology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Informatics, Decision-Enhancement, and Analytic Sciences (IDEAS) Center, VA Salt Lake City Health Care System, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Med Cannabis Cannabinoids. 2024 Nov 6;7(1):243-256. doi: 10.1159/000542472. eCollection 2024 Jan-Dec.
Medical cannabis (MC) use is increasing across the USA, with functional MC programs now operating in 38 states. While program policies and practices vary widely, little is known about whether and how states evaluate their programs. Better characterization of state MC program evaluation to date could inform states, program officials, and providers about best practices and provide a roadmap for future program evaluation.
We conducted a narrative review of state MC program evaluations, including peer-reviewed literature and reports produced by independent state-based and non-state-based evaluators. Among 304 abstracts initially screened, seven evaluations met inclusion criteria. Within these evaluations, we report results according to three overarching themes: (1) evaluation characteristics, including comparison across evaluations; (2) program experience, including perceptions of providers and patients; and (3) assessment of cannabis use, including self-reported efficacy for qualifying medical conditions, patterns of medical and nonmedical cannabis use, and assessment of risk factors relevant to MC use. Additionally, we found that while goals and methods for state MC evaluations varied widely, evaluations that relied on independent, non-state entities tended to have more comprehensive and quantitatively rigorous results.
Few states operating MC programs have completed a formal evaluation of their program. Among states that have completed an evaluation, approaches varied widely; however, common themes were also present, which may inform future state evaluation efforts. Evaluation through independent, non-state partners may provide an optimal strategy to ensure high-quality data and meaningful results.
医用大麻（MC）在美国的使用正在增加，目前有38个州实施了功能性医用大麻项目。虽然项目政策和做法差异很大，但对于各州是否以及如何评估其项目却知之甚少。更好地描述迄今为止各州医用大麻项目评估情况，可为各州、项目官员和提供者提供最佳实践信息，并为未来项目评估提供路线图。
我们对各州医用大麻项目评估进行了叙述性综述，包括同行评审文献以及由独立的州级和非州级评估者编制的报告。在最初筛选的304篇摘要中，有七项评估符合纳入标准。在这些评估中，我们根据三个总体主题报告结果：（1）评估特征，包括各项评估之间的比较；（2）项目体验，包括提供者和患者的看法；（3）大麻使用评估，包括对符合条件的医疗状况的自我报告疗效、医用和非医用大麻使用模式以及与医用大麻使用相关的风险因素评估。此外，我们发现，虽然各州医用大麻评估的目标和方法差异很大，但依赖独立非州实体的评估往往有更全面和定量严格的结果。
实施医用大麻项目的州中，很少有州完成对其项目的正式评估。在已完成评估的州中，方法差异很大；然而，也存在共同主题，这可能为未来各州的评估工作提供参考。通过独立的非州合作伙伴进行评估，可能是确保获得高质量数据和有意义结果的最佳策略。
